--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Comments from a wealthy friend of mine: > > > > It's interesting reading this below how Maharishi was the one who was more > tight with money than anyone I've ever known. I never saw him giving > anything to anyone, except maybe Tony Nader where he made that public > display of giving his weight in gold, but that was no doubt donated at his > request. He was only asking for more money all time even though he > controlled probably more than a billion, yet he upbraids others for lack of > generosity and compassion. What he writes below displays a lack of > understanding for bankers, who are just business people, like any other kind > of business. If bankers are to give away their profits, then why not > businesses of all types, which certainly is a good idea to give to charity > and help others, which he never did on any material level. His fantasy > about all the world's probem's being solved in "the Age of Enlightenment" or > Sat yuga, which he spoke of since we were kids and for which he claims > credit, along with Guru Dev, continues to be shown to be just that, a > fantasy. It's surprising with such a brilliant mind and such wisdom of the > Vedas he had these unusual quirks. > > In June 2007, Maharishi made some comments about banks, along with his > poverty removal program...
Banks make money by lending money at interest... Emphasis on MAKE... To suggest that bankers are businessmen in the usual sense of the word is to ignore what bankers do: they MAKE money. There's no reason why they couldn't make money to help the poor even if the investments are risky because, in fact, most of the higher-order instruments that they have created in the past few years, that have gotten us into this mess, are far more risky than what MMY proposed. Oh, and the Raam? No more a ponzi scheme than any other bank note including US treasury bills with President's faces on them. Lawson
